7.3 is on the low end to generate a tsunami unless it causes something else to happen (like a underwater landslide). The epicenter is further out that the 9.0 a couple years ago. It probably scared some people but I doubt there would be much damage.

The epicenter of this earthquake appears to be on the ocean side of the subduction zone, in one of the deepest parts of the ocean, 2 orders of magnitude less powerful and significantly further away from the islands of Japan than the 2009 earthquake that caused massive damage.

CSB:When the first one hit a few years back, a friend of my girlfriend called up screaming that we were going to die in a tsunami and that my girlfriend should grab the cats and come over but I wasn't invited. She didn't like me. Funny thing is, if a tsunami hit we were in a safer spot than her.

Earthquake was some 300-400 miles off the coast, about an hour ago. If a wave is going to arrive, it'll be shortly (tsunamis travel ~300-400 mph, IIRC). If it's not there in the next half-hour or so, it's not happening.

crotchgrabber:CSB:When the first one hit a few years back, a friend of my girlfriend called up screaming that we were going to die in a tsunami and that my girlfriend should grab the cats and come over but I wasn't invited. She didn't like me. Funny thing is, if a tsunami hit we were in a safer spot than her.

I'm at the beach, waiting for monsters.

You weren't invited? To an end of the world party? You should poison her sushi.

wsupfoo2:is 1m a significant tsunami? or just a "great, i just bought new carpets at my beach house" kind of event?

Height is obviously an issue, but even something low like this can cause significant damage because of the sheer amount of water coming behind it. This isn't a "wave" so much as "the ocean just got a meter higher and is coming at you like a wall".